Reasonable use expectations is a good idea, but between different party expectations, premade adventures that aren't always designed with a lot of flexibility, and other concerns, I've found it's not always a reliable assumption in practice.
And part of the problem with the Assassin is that it relies on those assumptions so much. Every subclass to some extent wants things to go a certain way and hurts if they don't (like warlocks and short rests, or artillerists and spaced out combats), but the assassin needs more and bigger changes than most and almost doesn't have subclass features if it doesn't get those adjustments, which is kind of a bummer.
I agree "reasonable use" is not encouraged and that represents why there's huge issue for assassin.
But I have seen dms and players make "reasonable use" calls even in adventurers league which is the worst offender design wise IMO. I have also seen the exact opposite at AL tables. However in my main groups R.U. players are the types of people I play with.
However, as I implied, such behavior should be fostered in 5e instead of such political like tactics as calling things "useless" when they aren't or using vague proof such as " it's situational" without any real backing data.
And if it's a bullshit take then that's probably because you haven't been playing D&D for as long as I have. Maybe you should listen to yourself when you utter what you put out there.
And if it's a bullshit take then that's probably because you haven't been playing D&D for as long as I have. Maybe you should listen to yourself when you utter what you put out there.
You're not helping your case as much as you may think here.
In a rogue, it's 1 attack that gets advantage that first round unless you have a bonus action attack from something. Steady Aim can do that on its own for a lot of pure rogues.
I agree with the 1 attack (or 2 with light weapons) part, but I don't agree with the steady aim part. Steady Aim is nice to have when you can use it, but there are a lot of problems with relying on it as a pure Rogue, the biggest two being cover and mobility.
Example - You are in a hallway with a door at the end fighter opens the door and there is an enemy inside to the right. You can't use steady aim at all because he has 100% cover and you can't move to get a shot at him. If the enemy is right in front of the fighter then you can use it, but he has cover because of the fighter (and other allies) between you and him and next turn you have the same issue because you haven't moved. This happens A LOT with Rogues I play. On a ranged Rogue, at least 50% of the turns there are problems or barriers with using steady aim effectively in combat.
Example - You are in a hallway with a door at the end fighter opens the door and there is an enemy inside to the right. You can't use steady aim at all because he has 100% cover and you can't move to get a shot at him. If the enemy is right in front of the fighter then you can use it, but he has cover because of the fighter (and other allies) between you and him and next turn you have the same issue because you haven't moved. This happens A LOT with Rogues I play. On a ranged Rogue, at least 50% of the turns there are problems or barriers with using steady aim effectively in combat.
Having it as an option on 50% of your turns is still a lot better than assassin's ability and the percentage will be nearly 100% for any situation where you'd actually get the second half of the assassin ability.
Example - You are in a hallway with a door at the end fighter opens the door and there is an enemy inside to the right. You can't use steady aim at all because he has 100% cover and you can't move to get a shot at him. If the enemy is right in front of the fighter then you can use it, but he has cover because of the fighter (and other allies) between you and him and next turn you have the same issue because you haven't moved. This happens A LOT with Rogues I play. On a ranged Rogue, at least 50% of the turns there are problems or barriers with using steady aim effectively in combat.
Having it as an option on 50% of your turns is still a lot better than assassin's ability and the percentage will be nearly 100% for any situation where you'd actually get the second half of the assassin ability.
On the first part, sure but assassins have that option too if it is available.
On the second haldf (criticial on anyone surprised) I don't think it would be 100% for any situation where you would be able to do steady aim , as a matter of fact I think it is the other way and is a lot less than 50% in that case. Surprise is an example where having the auito advantage would be a lot better. The amount of times you have surprise and don't need to move on your turn to make an attack are very small unless you are invisible. RAW to have surprise you must be unseen which usually means you have 100% cover and will need to move to attack thereby eliminating the ability to do steady aim (and eliminating advantage from being unseen).
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Assassin is a particularly strong subclass, but it is far from useless. The most damage I have seen done in a round in 5E was done by an Assassin-Paladin multiclass.
My friend completely refused to have anything to do with magic and thought thieves were lame. So he chose assassin, he became a murder hobo and the DM hated him. I guess my character was also a murder hobo but, who needs to know that? Both of our character sheets mysteriously disappeared a couple of levels after that.
In my opinion, Assassin rogue is not the best assassin. That would be a multiclass of glamour bard, blade pact GOO warlock and, if you want, thief rogue.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'Mr Moony presents his compliments to Professor Snape, and begs him to keep his abnormally large nose out of other people’s business.'
Snape froze. Harry stared, dumbstruck, at the message. But the map didn’t stop there. More writing was appearing beneath the first.
'Mr Prongs agrees with Mr Moony, and would like to add that Professor Snape is an ugly git.'-Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Stay sharp, always carry a dagger and never deal with a devil (except for me, of course).
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reasonable use expectations is a good idea, but between different party expectations, premade adventures that aren't always designed with a lot of flexibility, and other concerns, I've found it's not always a reliable assumption in practice.
And part of the problem with the Assassin is that it relies on those assumptions so much. Every subclass to some extent wants things to go a certain way and hurts if they don't (like warlocks and short rests, or artillerists and spaced out combats), but the assassin needs more and bigger changes than most and almost doesn't have subclass features if it doesn't get those adjustments, which is kind of a bummer.
I agree "reasonable use" is not encouraged and that represents why there's huge issue for assassin.
But I have seen dms and players make "reasonable use" calls even in adventurers league which is the worst offender design wise IMO. I have also seen the exact opposite at AL tables. However in my main groups R.U. players are the types of people I play with.
However, as I implied, such behavior should be fostered in 5e instead of such political like tactics as calling things "useless" when they aren't or using vague proof such as " it's situational" without any real backing data.
Your Assuming...
And if it's a bullshit take then that's probably because you haven't been playing D&D for as long as I have. Maybe you should listen to yourself when you utter what you put out there.
You're not helping your case as much as you may think here.
I agree with the 1 attack (or 2 with light weapons) part, but I don't agree with the steady aim part. Steady Aim is nice to have when you can use it, but there are a lot of problems with relying on it as a pure Rogue, the biggest two being cover and mobility.
Example - You are in a hallway with a door at the end fighter opens the door and there is an enemy inside to the right. You can't use steady aim at all because he has 100% cover and you can't move to get a shot at him. If the enemy is right in front of the fighter then you can use it, but he has cover because of the fighter (and other allies) between you and him and next turn you have the same issue because you haven't moved. This happens A LOT with Rogues I play. On a ranged Rogue, at least 50% of the turns there are problems or barriers with using steady aim effectively in combat.
Having it as an option on 50% of your turns is still a lot better than assassin's ability and the percentage will be nearly 100% for any situation where you'd actually get the second half of the assassin ability.
On the first part, sure but assassins have that option too if it is available.
On the second haldf (criticial on anyone surprised) I don't think it would be 100% for any situation where you would be able to do steady aim , as a matter of fact I think it is the other way and is a lot less than 50% in that case. Surprise is an example where having the auito advantage would be a lot better. The amount of times you have surprise and don't need to move on your turn to make an attack are very small unless you are invisible. RAW to have surprise you must be unseen which usually means you have 100% cover and will need to move to attack thereby eliminating the ability to do steady aim (and eliminating advantage from being unseen).
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Assassin is a particularly strong subclass, but it is far from useless. The most damage I have seen done in a round in 5E was done by an Assassin-Paladin multiclass.
My friend completely refused to have anything to do with magic and thought thieves were lame. So he chose assassin, he became a murder hobo and the DM hated him. I guess my character was also a murder hobo but, who needs to know that? Both of our character sheets mysteriously disappeared a couple of levels after that.
In my opinion, Assassin rogue is not the best assassin. That would be a multiclass of glamour bard, blade pact GOO warlock and, if you want, thief rogue.
'Mr Moony presents his compliments to Professor Snape, and begs him to keep his abnormally large nose out of other people’s business.'
Snape froze. Harry stared, dumbstruck, at the message. But the map didn’t stop there. More writing was appearing beneath the first.
'Mr Prongs agrees with Mr Moony, and would like to add that Professor Snape is an ugly git.'-Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Stay sharp, always carry a dagger and never deal with a devil (except for me, of course).